Takanashi
TNPer
Ruling Family: The Imperial House of Hanover
Regional Population: 580 (-15)
The Monarchy
Sovereign: King-Emperor George VI
Consort: Queen-Consort Skye I
Prince of Wales: HIBH Prince Victor I
Prince Royal: HIBH Prince Cornelius
HM Civil Executive Government
Rt. Hon. Prime Minister: Francis Hanover
Rt. Hon. Deputy Prime Minister: Marcie Sebastian
Secretary of State for Home Affairs: Nick Talleyrand-Hanover
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs: Constantine Hanover
Secretary of State for Culture: Sacul Astoria
Officers of State
First Lord of the Admiralty: Cornelius Talleyrand
Chief of the Imperial Naval Staff:Edward Windsor
Director-General of the SIS: Theoden Sebastian
Lord High Steward: Richard Stewart
HM Supreme Court
Lord Chief Justice: Nathaniel Lancaster
Lord Sr. Associate Justice: Cornelius Talleyrand
Lord Jr. Associate Justice: Charles Lancaster[c]
The House of Lords
Lord High Chancellor
Victor Lancaster, Prince of Wales
Cornelius Talleyrand, Prince Royal
Charles IX Lancaster, Grand Duke of Ireland
John Hanover, The Duke of Norfolk
Fitzgerald Ravensdale, Duke of Richmond
William Bettingham, Duke of Calais
Theoden Sebastian, Duke of Gloucester
Nick Talleyrand-Hanover, Viscount of Leon
The House of Commons
The Hon. Speaker of the House of Commons:
Akillian Talleyrand
Akillian Talleyrand of Scotland (BRP)
Damian Talleyrand-Hanover of France (CON)
Francis Hanover of France (CON)
Constantine Hanover of Ireland (CON)
Marcie Sebastian of Wales (I)
Status of The House: OPENED
Majority: Conservative (CON)
Loyal Opposition:British Royalist Party (BRP)
[img=332,275]http://www.bbc.co.uk/staticarchive/010332176fd6316c92c2522e3d583605fd95f8c7.jpg[/img]
The Court has been of great assistance to Parliament in recent times. With a new Constitution came the need to reenact old laws as well as improve upon them. Unfortunately with this came the tendency for the will of Parliament to sometimes cross paths with the rule of the highest legal document in the land, The Imperial Constitution of The Kingdom of Great Britain. The first to suffer such a fate was the Citizenship Act (2015) proposed by MP Nick Hanover during the previous session of Parliament. Soon after it's proposal to the House floor Lord John Norfolk asked a legal question of the courts questioning the proposals Constitutionality. After much legal research the Lord Chief Justice Nathaniel Lancaster found the proposed law unconstitutional.
During the current Parliamentary session, a law by the name of the Foreign Treaties and Agreements Act (2015) was proposed by Lord William Bettingham to the floor of the House of Lords. Almost immediately after it's proposal, Member of Parliament for Ireland His Britannic Highness Constantine Hanover, immediately suspicious of its constitutionality, asked a legal question of the Supreme Court to either confirm or deny his suspicious. Again, after much legal research Lord Chief Justice Lancaster came to the decision that this law was yet again, unconstitutional. Both opinions will be published in a spoiler below.
Advisory Opinion
Regarding the proposed Citizenship Act in Parliment.
Regarding the proposed Citizenship Act in Parliment.
The Citizenship Act 2015 - 06/2015 - # 13:
GEORGE VI
The Citizenship Act 2015 (2014)
Date of Proposal: 23/06/2015
Proposed by: Nick Hanover (MP)
Written by: Nick Hanover
Serial Number: HB; 06.2015.0003(continuing to 99)
Current Bill Stage: Debate | Voting | Imperial Assent
BE IT ENACTED by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
Short Title
The Citizenship Act
Long Title
The Citizenship Act 2015
Definitions
1. “Citizen” a member of the Kingdom of Great Britain’s off site forum.
2. "Citizenship Applicant" - The individual who has applied for citizenship on the off-site forum.
Provisions
1. This act will enable people to become citizens of this region on the off site forum.
2. The Home Secretary and His Majesty the King will be the only people able to approve citizenship of the region
3. A citizenship applicant may be granted citizenship if:
(a) The official application forum has been correctly filled in.
(b) They have a nation in the Kingdom of Great Britain.
4. Failure to meet any of the above requirements will lead to the citizenship application being declined
5. A applicant has the right to appeal to the courts if their application is declined.
6. The Home Secretary has the power to question any member via PM if they feel that there is something suspicious about their application.
7. The Home Secretary or His Majesty the King must provide valid reasoning in public for a rejected application.
8. In the event of the Home Secretary being unavailable or the king for more than 24 hours then the Prime Minister shall have the power to accept or refuse the application.
9. A citizen may have their citizenship removed if:
(a) They fail to maintain a nation in the Kingdom of Great Britain without informing the Home Office.
(b) They are deemed a security threat following a fair and open court trial.
Article I. Section A.:
Article III. Section D.:
Article III. Section G.:
Request.
John Hanover, has requested from the Justices to submit to the Office of Legal Aid, Advisory Opinions on the proposed Citizenship Act that is currently under consideration by the Parliament.
Reasoning.
Upon review, I have found three provisions which speak to this issue. I have quoted them above. Depending on how you read these texts, they could be congruent or contradictory.
However, I am of the opinion, that we should read the laws as plainly as possible. It helps to avoid confusion, and applies a dose of common sense which is characteristic of our region.
Therefore, as we look at Article I, the Constitution clearly expects that legislation could be made in regards to citizenship. This section is consistent to this legislation. Therefore, we can dispose of our concern over this provision.
While at the same time our eyes move to the second quotation. Article III states that the Monarchy has a royal prerogative in regards to citizenship.
The most major problem here is, that the Article III quotation is consisting of nothing but commas. Unfortunately, punctuation is key to the meaning of this clause. Reading it with grammatical rules in mind, instead of stating that the Monarchy has total control over citizenships, it only has authority in regards to those deemed a security risk by the Secret Intelligence Service.
If you go back to the proposed legislation and read the provisions, ironically, the probable typographical error of Article III, actually makes the proposed legislation unconstitutional.
Please notice that the proposed legislation, tries to modify the use of banishment or rejection of possible or actual citizens that are to be classified as a security risk. The classification and the determination of a security risk lies solely with Their Majesties and the Secret Intelligence Service. (Provision 9(b).)
Now, our we move to the third quotation. Their Majesties are fully immune from court action in any form. This is violated specifically by Provision 5 and Provision 9(b). Provision 9(b) is included in the violation of Their Majesties protection from prosecution, because as was explained earlier, a security risk can only be defined by Their Majesties or the SIS, to sue them in open court would be a civil prosecution. Again, this is unconstitutional.
Conclusion.
Thanks to the previous REASONING, this bill is determined to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Advisory Opinion
Regarding the proposed THE FOREIGN TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS ACT (2015) in Parliment.
Regarding the proposed THE FOREIGN TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS ACT (2015) in Parliment.
THE FOREIGN TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS ACT - 07/2015 - # 14th:
GEORGE VI
THE FOREIGN TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS ACT (2015)
Date of Proposal: 16/07/2015
Proposed by: His Grace, Lord William Bettingham
Written by: His Grace, Lord William Bettingham
Serial Number: HB; 07.2015.0001(continuing to 99)
Current Bill Stage: Debate | Voting | Imperial Assent
BE IT ENACTED by the King’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
The Foreign Treaties Act
The Foreign Treaties and Agreements Act
Definitions
1. A "treaty" is defined as any legally binding document signed between our region and one or a number of foreign regions.
2. For the purpose of this legislation, "region," includes any recognized foreign entities with the NS world.
Provisions
1. Deliberations
a. All deliberations between our region and a foreign government about entering into a treaty must include the monarch and the Prime Minister.
b. The Prime Minister may, at their discretion, also include members of their government into the negotiations with a foreign region.
c. The monarch, if they are unable to attend in person, may send a representative on their behalf to be present at the negotiations.
2. Signing
a. For a treaty with a foreign region to become law, it must be signed both by the monarch and the Prime Minister.
3. Review Period
a. A period of review will be provided for all treaties with foreign regions after they've been signed.
b. This period will last 10 days, and begin immediately after signing.
c. During this period, the House of Lords may at their discretion choose to review the treaty. The review will consist of an examination of the treaty, a debate on the treaty, and then a vote to confirm or deny the treaty.
d. If the House of Lords votes to deny the treaty, then the treaty is voided.
e. The monarch has the power to override a denial vote in the House of Lords by issuing an imperial decree.
3. Implementation
a. This act will become law immediately upon receiving the signature of the monarch.
1.
2.Article VI. Section C.:
3.Article II. Section O.:
4.Article III. Section D.:
5.Article III. Section E.:
6.Article II. Section D.:
7.Article II. Section E.:
Article IV. Section E:
Request.
Constantine Hanover has requested from the Justices of the Supreme Court, to submit Advisory Opinions to the Office of Legal Aid, on the proposed Foreign Treaties Act that is currently under consideration by the Parliament.
Reasoning.
--- Preface
Upon review, I have found several provisions of the Constitution which could speak to this proposed legislation. I have quoted some of them above for easy reference. I am going to try my best to ensure that my reasoning relegates itself into an order that makes sense, my apologies if you have a difficult time following along, because this answer is going to be less straightforward than some may like. You will find a summary of this opinion at the end of this document, that will hopefully make this all more easier to understand. -- For the rest of you that are willing to pay attention, come with me, and we will trek though the vast forest that is the Constitution of the Kingdom.
--- Legal Reasoning
When interpreting a Constitution, I find that you cannot limit your scope of inquiry into simply one section of the Constitution. Constitutions are by nature, documents that give themselves context when read as a whole. It is many the case that the articles and sections that make the Constitution rely on each other to create the system of governance that we have. You should not assume that the clauses of the Constitution stand alone, as there is more than likely, a restriction written into another section, in a different article. More or less, its like a game where each player has specific abilities, that can restrict or overrule other players, while confined within the circle of the game.
In this case the Constitution defines the parameters of the governing actors, and limits the actions of those same governing actors. It is clear that the Constitution is the highest law in the land, and that it is supreme and supersedes all other laws, excepting for those Imperial Decrees that the King issues to amend the Constitution. (Quote 1)
Thereby, if you take an action that is contrary to the provisions of the Constitution, you are penalized. This is why the Constitution, operates on the principle of limited governance. The Constitution only provides for those actions which you are allowed to take. If an action is not listed, then it is an illegal and unconstitutional action. For instance, the Prime Minister has the ability to create and dissolve government ministries, however, that is only because the Constitution explicitly granted that ability (Article IV. Section E. Clause 2, KGB Constitution).
This principle is compounded over and confirmed by other sections of the Constitution. For instance, Section O, dictates that we must amend the Constitution prior to adopting a treaty, if provisions of the Constitution are going to be violated. Hence, the Constitution is again superior in its ability to even limit the scope of treaties that we sign together with foreign powers. (Quote 2)
Therefore, Royal Prerogatives, listed in Article II of sections D, E, & F; can only be exercised by the Crown, as stated, and thus make it unconstitutional to remove, restrict, regulate, revise, or relegate any of them by ordinary legislation.
Furthermore, if a governing actor is not explicitly stated to have a power or responsibility, then that governing actor cannot act in such manner.
--- Incompatibilities of the Bill
Provision 1: The Prime Minister, nor any cabinet or government officer, has been granted the ability to represent the Kingdom in Foreign Relations. All Ambassadors, are only accredited though the Monarch, and therefore all foreign relations must be handled by Their Majesties. (Quote 4)
Provision 2: The Prime Minister is only granted the powers conferred to him though Section E. There is no clause which enables Parliament to expand the power of the Prime Minister or the Cabinet. It is INCUMBENT on the Monarch and prerogative to sign treaties into force. The Prime Minster has no such ability. (Quotes 3, 4, & 7)
--- Compatibility of the Bill
Provision 3: The Parliament's Houses, do not originally have the right to debate or vote on the creation or acceptance of treaties. While Section O may allude to such an ability, it is not currently the case.
Clause G, of Houses rights, does speak to the ability to expand their powers though law. So, the creation of a procedure by law to determine the fate of a treaty, is entirely permissible. Especially since, such a vote wouldn't matter anyway, because the Monarch can sign it into law over their objections. (Quotes 4, 5, & 6).
Conclusion.
This Bill is in its majority, Unconstitutional, and in the personal opinion of the Lord Chief Justice, entirely useless, because the constitutional parts of the Bill simply re-affirm what the Constitution already mandates in the first place.
Summary.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the Land, and no action or law, can violate it. The King is entirely responsible for Foreign Affairs: from ambassadors, to negotiations, to approving the treaties. Even if Parliament did vote on said treaty, such a vote is an exercise in chamber opinion, and non-controlling, because the Monarch can sign the treaty into law, regardless of the outcome of said voting.
Advice.
I would like to advise His Majesty the King, and the Prime Minister, to look into ways of expanding the role of His Civil Government in Foreign Affairs via an Imperial Decree that amends the Constitution.
If Parliament would like to vote on a treaty, they can vote on either a seperate or joint Resolution in support or disbelief of said treaty. Although, I'll remind you that such resolutions have no force in law.
Juris Lancaster
Lord Chief Justice
Supreme Court
Kingdom of Great Britain
Lord Chief Justice
Supreme Court
Kingdom of Great Britain
For: The Office of Legal Aid
[c]
[img=332,275]https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/cameron1.jpg[/img]
Viewers tuned in everywhere to the latest series of Prime Minister’s Questions on BBC Parliament, only to find the Prime Minister asleep at the dispatch box. The Loyal Opposition, far from making issue of this, secured a blanky and teddy for the exhausted Prime Minister, in an astonishing show of unity from the House of Commons.
Internal Party Memo’s indicate that the key subject at next weeks Prime Minister’s Questions will be that of the Blanky and Teddy Relief Fund, with a call to increase the funds available expected.
[img=332,275]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/a7/b7/13/a7b7138956c401203e24acce84c0fcbb.jpg[/img]
There is never a dull moment in the Department for Culture, Media, and Sport, with recent weeks proving no exception. Under the supervision of Culture Secretary Sacul Astoria, and Deputy Secretary Akillian Talleyrand, many citizens were able to survive a horror crash on a desert island – and without resorting to cannibalism (well, for the most part; reports indicate that one citizen was bitten by Akillian, with the Rt. Hon. Prime Minister starting a discussion on how best to prepare food involving unconventional meats).
But alas, no sooner had the ships rescued our stranded friends, the Culture Secretary and Co. have already begun planning for the upcoming Anniversary celebrations; rumor has it, that Sacul had been doodling plans on the beaches even when stranded, and had to be dragged away screaming and kicking – relenting only when he realised his kicks had ruined his drawings.
'I will have vengeance!' Sacul could be heard screaming, suggesting an unfortunate fate may await someone at the Anniversary festival, although he may have been speaking about a new brand of ice cream, given he screamed such with spoon in hand.
[img=332,275]http://www.bwvsg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/electionDayVoteBallotBox.jpg[/img]
The 13th Parliamentary Session in our region’s history was cut rather short, with the King disbanding Parliament and calling for a new election while the term was still well in progress. Despite seeing support from Parliament, the Government had been at odds with the public for a majority of the term and, moved to action, His Majesty the King called for a new Government to be summoned.
In stark contrast to the previous, short-lived Parliament, both the BRP and Labour were completely routed at the polls by the Conservatives, a party which emerged during the previous term, largely as a splinter party of the BRP, like an alien bursting from John Hurt’s chest. Labour was pushed out of the Commons entirely this term, with the BRP only keeping a foothold thanks to Akillian Talleyrand, who has successfully maintained his post in the Legislature for an impressive number of terms. Despite this, the government formed by newly-chosen Prime Minister Francis Hanover is largely bipartisan in its composition, with members from all three parties taking part in the Cabinet, along with Marcie Sebastian, the only Independent in the House of Commons.
- All hugs, cuddles, and huggles are expected to be taxed in an upcoming report from the Bank of England; BBC Worldwide understands, however, that snuggles are to be exempt from this tax, raising concerns of huggle evasion.
- To combat declining birth rates, The Rt. Hon. Francis has set aside one night a week for "date night" - lead medical officers question the success rate of this plan, pointing out that tacos cannot give birth.
- Online sources indicate that Marcie Sebastian, accompanied by HIBM Queen Skye I, was spotted on the High Street, shopping for a new font colour! It is understood Her Majesty insisted on pink, but was quickly rebuffed. How could you be mean like that, Marcie?!?
[img=260,190]http://www.arizonafoothillsmagazine.com/valleygirlblog/wp-content/uploads/Gossip-Girl-gossip-girl-16115237-1280-1024.jpg[/img]
- The Department for Culture, Media, and Sport
- The Home Office
- HBH Constantine Hanover, Foreign Secretary
- HSDH Charles XI
- Number 10 Downing Street
- The British Broadcasting Corporation
- Their Majestys King George VI and Queen Skye I
- AND VIEWERS LIKE YOU.... THANK YOU!
